@PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "It's been a good month since my exposure to AxisHOST's FTP problems,
which have not yet been resolved for me, so I'd like to ask now,
particularly for anyone using Theodore, but also for users of other
AxisHOST servers:
Are you successfully FTPing files to your servers with FileZilla?
If so, using FTPES? Or FTPS? or SFTP? or just plain FTP?
If with one of the three secure forms listed first, which one,
and what are the critical options settings you're using?
I used to use FTPES, back in the days of Tina, before Josh M
took the company over, and had no difficulties whatsoever, using
"passive" (in the passive/active choice) and all else pretty
much at FileZilla default settings.
These days, while those settings let me log in, and get me a
response to PWD (I learn that my current WD is "/"), 99 times
out of 100 the subsequent LIST command times out without
response (60 sec. timeout setting).
Plain clear-text FTP *does* work for me, but I'd rather not
send my AUTH data in the clear if at all avoidable.
The *one* time in 100 that the subsequent lIST command
*did* work, I was able to do a CWD /public_html, but not
a CWD to any of the directories in my /public_html area,
as the following (edited and commented) FTP transcript shows:
Status:	Resolving IP-Address for tlvp.net
Status:	Connecting to 83.161.120.155:21...
Status:	Connection established, waiting for welcome message...
Response:	220 Welcome to Pure-FTPd [privsep] [TLS] 
Response:	220-You are user number 9 of 50 allowed.
Response:	220-Local time is now 20:51. Server port: 21.
Response:	220 You will be disconnected after 15 minutes of inactivity.
Command:	AUTH TLS
Response:	234 AUTH TLS OK.
Status:	Initializing TLS...
Command:	USER [myUSERid]
Status:	Verifying certificate...
Status:	TLS/SSL connection established.
Response:	331 User [myUSERid] OK. Password required
Command:	PASS **********
Response:	230 OK. Current restricted directory is /
Command:	SYST
Response:	215 UNIX Type: L8
  [ ... Command:	FEAT and long response thereto snipped ... ]
Command:	PBSZ 0
Response:	200 PBSZ=0
Command:	PROT P
Response:	200 Data protection level set to "private"
Status:	Connected
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/" is your current location
Command:	TYPE I
Response:	200 TYPE is now 8-bit binary
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,125,101)
Command:	LIST
Response:	150 Accepted data connection
Response:	226-Options: -a -l
Response:	226 22 matches total
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,120,179)
Command:	LIST -a
Response:	150 Accepted data connection
Response:	226-Options: -a -l
Response:	226 22 matches total
Status:	Calculating timezone offset of server...
Command:	MDTM .ftpquota
Response:	213 20110730072224
Status:	Timezone offsets: Server: -18000 seconds. Local: -14400 seconds.  
Difference: 3600 seconds.
Status:	Directory listing successful
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
First time that's succeeded in over a month. Next, a CD:
Command:	CWD /public_html
Response:	250 OK. Current directory is /public_html
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/public_html" is your current location
That succeeded, too. But now, ...
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,118,159)
Command:	LIST -a
Response:	150 Accepted data connection
Response:	226-Options: -a -l
Response:	226 16 matches total
Status:	Directory listing successful
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
Command:	CWD /public_html/~b.mikolajewska
Response:	250 OK. Current directory is /public_html/~b.mikolajewska
Could be ... but FileZilla's UI still shows only /public_html
in the "current remote directory" address line, and ...
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/public_html/~b.mikolajewska" is your current location
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,175,53)
Command:	LIST -a
Error:	Connection timed out
Error:	Failed to retrieve directory listing
... no response to the LIST command.
So: trying again:
Status:	Resolving IP-Address for tlvp.net
Status:	Connecting to 83.161.120.155:21...
Status:	Connection established, waiting for welcome message...
Response:	220 Welcome to Pure-FTPd [privsep] [TLS] 
Response:	220-You are user number 8 of 50 allowed.
Response:	220-Local time is now 20:54. Server port: 21.
Response:	220 You will be disconnected after 15 minutes of inactivity.
Command:	AUTH TLS
Response:	234 AUTH TLS OK.
Status:	Initializing TLS...
Command:	USER [myUSERid]
Status:	Verifying certificate...
Status:	TLS/SSL connection established.
Response:	331 User [myUSERid] OK. Password required
Command:	PASS **********
Response:	230 OK. Current restricted directory is /
Command:	PBSZ 0
Response:	200 PBSZ=0
Command:	PROT P
Response:	200 Data protection level set to "private"
Status:	Connected
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
Command:	CWD /public_html/~b.mikolajewska
Response:	250 OK. Current directory is /public_html/~b.mikolajewska
This response again doesn't match what FileZilla shows in its
"current remote directory" address line, which is still just
/public_html ...
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/public_html/~b.mikolajewska" is your current location
Command:	TYPE I
Response:	200 TYPE is now 8-bit binary
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,142,3)
Command:	LIST -a
Error:	Connection timed out
Error:	Failed to retrieve directory listing
... and again the LIST command times out.
Comments? Ideas? Suggestions?
Cheers, and TIA,  tlvp
PS: yet another attempt:
I get as far as getting a LISTing of the directory  
/public_html/~fej.math.wes
but then trying to change directories to /public_html/~b.mikolajewska  
fails:
Status:	Resolving IP-Address for tlvp.net
Status:	Connecting to 83.161.120.155:21...
Status:	Connection established, waiting for welcome message...
Response:	220 Welcome to Pure-FTPd [privsep] [TLS] 
Response:	220-You are user number 8 of 50 allowed.
Response:	220-Local time is now 21:31. Server port: 21.
Response:	220 You will be disconnected after 15 minutes of inactivity.
Command:	AUTH TLS
Response:	234 AUTH TLS OK.
Status:	Initializing TLS...
Command:	USER [myUSERid]
Status:	Verifying certificate...
Status:	TLS/SSL connection established.
Response:	331 User [myUSERid] OK. Password required
Command:	PASS **********
Response:	230 OK. Current restricted directory is /
Command:	PBSZ 0
Response:	200 PBSZ=0
Command:	PROT P
Response:	200 Data protection level set to "private"
Status:	Connected
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
Command:	CWD /public_html
Response:	250 OK. Current directory is /public_html
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/public_html" is your current location
Command:	TYPE I
Response:	200 TYPE is now 8-bit binary
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,119,196)
Command:	LIST -a
Response:	150 Accepted data connection
Response:	226-Options: -a -l
Response:	226 16 matches total
Status:	Directory listing successful
Great: I can find, CWD to, and LIST /public_html ...
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
Command:	CWD /public_html/~fej.math.wes
Response:	250 OK. Current directory is /public_html/~fej.math.wes
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/public_html/~fej.math.wes" is your current location
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,134,35)
Command:	LIST -a
Response:	150 Accepted data connection
Response:	226-Options: -a -l
Response:	226 34 matches total
Status:	Directory listing successful
... and I can find, CWD to, and LIST one of the directories in there ...
Status:	Retrieving directory listing...
Command:	CWD /public_html/~b.mikolajewska
... but if I want to CWD to a *different* directory in /public_html ...
Response:	250 OK. Current directory is /public_html/~b.mikolajewska
... while the *response* of the FTP daemon is reassuring,
FileZilla shows that the "current remote directory" is still  
~b.mikolajewska ,
and a LIST command ...
Command:	PWD
Response:	257 "/public_html/~b.mikolajewska" is your current location
Command:	PASV
Response:	227 Entering Passive Mode (68,71,137,60,155,57)
Command:	LIST -a
Error:	Connection timed out
Error:	Failed to retrieve directory listing
... times out.
HELP!  tlvp"
    @john: "<quote>
Have you tried using a different FTP client? 
<url>
Or even better, use telnet, since it is a bare-bones tool that can show 
you what's going on under the hood. <url>
A popular free and free (free of monetary cost, and free of 
restrictions, a.k.a. "libre <<url> 
or FLOSS <<url> 
Windows terminal emulator that can be used to telnet is PuTTY: 
<url>
Telnet is a tool every computer user should have in their toolbox, 
unless you are wasting away in Facebookville, Twitterville, and the like.
You could also try booting a GNU/Linux LiveCD and testing outside of 
Windows. That could isolate your problems to your computer, or 
AxisHOST's. Find (locate) the trouble location first, then you know the 
arena to occupy for repairing the problem, or reporting the problem.
A little birdie told me that Windows has a few problems. I think it was 
a penguin. ;-)
You might want to study a "chroot jail" so you will understand how/why 
the directory shown to you is not the actual filesystem directory on the 
remote FTP server. <url>
In your defense, you are certainly doing one thing right: not sending 
your authentication in cleartext. Dobra robota! 8-)
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @arniegoetchius: "<quote>
12:55 pm I just accessed AH with FileZilla. Following are my settings:
Host: alvin.genwebserver.com (As I recall you are on Theodore)
Port: leave blank
Protocol: FTP
Encryption: Plain text (could not get TLS to work) (does not work in 
WS_FTP PRO either)
Login: normal
User: same as for cpanel
Password: same as for cpanel
After testing off an on for the last half hour, my last couple of attempts 
have failed so I cannot get in with either WS_FTP PRO or Filezilla.
Also 1:29pm I now cannot get into any of my websites. I'll wait a bit and 
then submit a ticket."
    @john: "<quote>
Curiosity killed the cat....
I have FileZilla 83.161.120.155, and here is the scoop from the Help menu > 
About... "About FileZilla":
Compiled for: i486-linux-gnu
Compiled on: i486-linux-gnu
Build date: 2008-07-25
Compiled with: i486-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 4.2.3 (Ubuntu 4.2.3-2ubuntu7)on 
Logia, an Ubuntu 8.04 LTS system beside me.
Compiler flags: -g -O2 -Wall -g -fexceptions
Totally immaterial for you I suspect.
Anyway, the File menu > Site Manager shows the following:
General tab:
Host: upload.att.net     Port: {blank}
Servertype: FTPES - FTP over explicit TLS/SSL
Logontype: Normal
Password: {munged by a line of dots}
Account: {grayed out blank box}
Advanced tab:
Severtype: Default (Autodetect)
Bypass proxy {unchecked}
Nothing else is entered
Transfer settings tab:
Transfer mode: Default
Nothing else set
Charset tab:
Autodetect
There is an Edit menu > Settings... which has a "Run configuration 
wizard now" button on the Connections item. Perhaps that would be 
something to try?
Sorry I can't be of more assistance. Even if you gave me your 
authentication information, my OS is so much different than yours, and 
likely FileZilla too, I probably wouldn't be able to help you. That 
would also eliminate Beau I'm afraid.
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @john: "<quote>
Back in a dark period of my life, before Linux, I used WS_FTP_Pro under 
Windows XP Pro. It was the only FTP client at the time that would allow 
me to access the AT&T PWP site. It was not free but, it was/is a good 
FTP client.
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @anonymous: "<quote>
Beau just uses FTP with FileZilla and Axishost. It's working.
   -bts
   -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul"
    @anonymous: "Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
<quote>
..and oh yeah, I did send several files to one of my sites this
morning, about three hours ago (Alvin).
   -bts
   -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul"
    @arniegoetchius: "<quote>
Correct. That's why I first started using it.
Axis host shut down my site because I was experimenting with encryption 
for WS_FTP PRO and Filezilla. Each time I tried something different,  I 
would get a "failed to connect" error message.
Josh said, in part, "I found your IP, to be listed in our firewall by the 
network scrutinizer software we have created to have been port scanning 
11+ times in 215 seconds.  The software can classify ping, traceroute, 
nmap as well as a few other services against it as port scanning.""
    @arniegoetchius: "<quote>
I has a couple of email exchanges with gregoryroberts@example.com. He enabled SSH for all 
of my accounts and I changed Filezilla protocol to SFTP. That works. If 
you were using SFTP in Filezilla before the transfer, you may have to have 
Josh enable SSH on the new server for your accounts."
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 13:42:00 -0400, John F. Morse <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
Coincidence! I'm using 83.161.120.155 as well (just compiled for Windows).
Pretty much the same settings as I use (well, I have "passive" where
you have "Default" (transfer mode), but that *used* to work reliably).
On two test occasions, simply changing the FTPES option to FTP let
everything work correctly  PWD, LIST, CWD, PUT, GET, etc  but I
do *not* want to remain with clear-text FTP (sans TLS) indefinitely.
Thanks for the attempt, John. Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 13:30:24 -0400, Arnie Goetchius  
<quote>
Oh, FTP  that's worked for me, no sweat  I want FTPES !
That's my problem, too, and I'll switch web hosts if it persists!
Good grief, Arnie! Maybe Josh needs to hire Tina to come back and  
administer again.
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 14:28:08 -0400, Arnie Goetchius  
<quote>
Outrageous!
Evidently the software treats LIST and CWD and PWD as intrusions? as
port scanning? That's misconfigured software if ever there was such!
I hope Josh gets this under control! (Sigh!)
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 14:05:07 -0400, Beauregard T. Shagnasty  
<quote>
FTP? without an AUTH TLS preamble?
or FTPES (with an AUTH TLS preamble)?
For me, plain old insecure clear-text AUTH FTP is a security threat,
I want to use FTPES ... and I did throughout Tina's tenure, and much
of Josh's  *until* the recent server changes.
And I want FTPES back again :-) (!) .
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 17:07:30 -0400, Arnie Goetchius  
<quote>
SFTP using SSH  I could live with that :-) .
Thanks for the tip. Glad Josh could sort that out for you this way,
I guess I'll have to get him to do the same for me on Theodore.
FTPES with TLS is what I'd been using, 'til it broke,
but SFTP using SSH  I could live with that :-) .
Any particular settings (Port # , Active/Passive/Default, etc.)
I'd need to make special note of?
Thanks again. And cheers,  tlvp"
    @anonymous: "<quote>
Thass what I said...
Whom do you suspect is eavesdropping on your connection?
   -bts
   -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul"
    @arniegoetchius: "<quote>
I left the port # blank and other settings to default
Josh told me: "I've enabled Jailed SSH for all of your accounts." 
Haven't a clue what that means but it did the job."
    @john: "<quote>
<url>
<url>
<url>
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @john: "<quote>
I mentioned that earlier today: <url>
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @anonymous: "<quote>
Have you any words to go with those links? Something that would
convince me to use bandwidth to watch three movies?
   -bts
   -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 22:17:29 -0400, Beauregard T. Shagnasty  
<quote>
"Man in the Middle" attacks (two musical interpretations, one stand-up  
comedy).
The first (ABBA) one is not bad, aamof :-) . Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 21:25:55 -0400, Arnie Goetchius  
<quote>
I'll have to quote him that, if he's not planning to offer the same to me.
Thanks. And cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 21:16:38 -0400, Beauregard T. Shagnasty  
<quote>
The same person or persons who, when the guy who trimmed my hedges the  
other day
was out of eye contact with his bicycle parked against a curbside tree,  
snatched
that bike. Or maybe someone else. But why do you ask?
Must I *really* have a suspect in mind before I make an effort to protect  
myself?
Anyway, there are three stages to my connection: wi-fi from computer to  
router,
local loop copper for DSL from router to CO, internet from CO to AxisHOST.
TLS-protected AUTH data are (relatively) safe from all but NSA-level  
snooping,
no matter who or what the suspects might be.
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @edantu: "<quote>
No, you don't have to have a suspect in mind prior to taking steps to 
protect yourself, but the entire idea is to be realistic about it.
You provide an example of someone who left a bike unprotected (out of 
sight) for a time, and found the bike gone - but people DO walk by where 
the bike was left, and finding it unprotected, took advantage of that. 
No 'experience' required, no 'skills' nothing - just happened by.
The question is, just who do you think would just 'happen by' and 
eavesdrop on your conversation with a server?  Someone who just happens 
to know how to eavesdrop (without being detected), who has the skills 
required to use the knowledge thus gained?  That restricts the 'chances' 
down from 75% of the population (in the bike case) to less than 10% of 
the population in the first place.  Secondly, people, even those who CAN 
do it, don't just 'happen' by while you are conversing with a server - 
because it simply doesn't happen that way.  How many conversations with 
servers have YOU just happened by and witnessed?
No, the point being that for someone who has the required skills, 
knowledge and the wherewithall to eavesdrop on conversations with 
servers is simply NOT going to be looking at you - just what would 
he/she gain by such? Passwords to a site? Childs play. Temporary control 
of a site, again, childs play.
It is POSSIBLE, but very unlikely, that someone can sit on your IP and 
record ALL traffic in and out - and even SSL encryption can be broken 
with enough computer time - but the fact of the matter is, anyone with 
such tools, time, and knowledge ISN'T going to waste their time with you 
or your sites  -  they will be after bigger fish, like SONY Online or 
EVE Online (both of which have been hacked recently btw).
Sure, you have to be AWARE that such threats exist, but be realistic 
about the protections required to protect YOUR data -  if it isn't worth 
several thousands of dollars then it simply isnt worth hacking into."
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 13:42:00 -0400, John F. Morse <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
OK, I tried it. Had to let the FileZilla server determine my external IP,
but that's OK. Transcript of the last such session (unsuccessful) follows:
  Connecting to probe.filezilla-project.org
  Response: 220 FZ router and firewall tester ready
  USER FileZilla
  Response: 331 Give any password.
  PASS 83.161.120.155                     # That's just the FileZilla version  
number
  Response: 230 logged on.
  Checking for correct external IP address
  Retrieving external IP address from <url>
  Checking for correct external IP address
  IP 83.161.120.155 jj-df-fj-cde
  Response: 200 OK
  PREP 58735
  Response: 200 Using port 58735, data token 351.694.2859
  PORT 99,35,59,234,229,111
  Response: 200 PORT command successful
  LIST
  Response: 150 opening data connection
  Response: 503 Failure of data connection.
  Server sent invalid reply.
  Connection closed
Not sure what's going on here. But FileZilla reacts as if it's bad.
Thanks for the idea, though, John  nothing ventured, nothing gained :-) .
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 21:25:55 -0400, Arnie Goetchius  
<quote>
I took that as a cue to try the SSH version of secure FTP,
i.e. SFTP. Worked like a charm this time (I had tried both
SFTP and FTPS earlier, with both falling flat on their faces).
Two odd things: First, I'm not in a Chroot Jail  where I start out
in "/", expecting (from prior successfully connections) that first
directory will be "/public_html", I actually have to traverse the
following FQPN before I reach "public_html" :
  /home/tlvpnet/public_html/
and only from there on out do I get to the subdirectories that house
my web pages, pictures, PDFs, and so on.
Along with /home, I also have access to
  "/bin"
  "/dev"
  "/etc"
  "/lib"
  "/lib64"
  "/opt"
  "/proc"
  "/usr"
  "/var"
and all their subdirectories, as well, seemingly, as
  "/tmp"
(except that I can't LIST that one).
Doesn't look like a Chroot Jail to me at all :-)  if I
were in a Chroot Jail, what I now see as "/home/tlvpnet/"
should be presented to me simply as "/", blindering me
to all the directories I've just tabulated above.
And second, something's way wacked out with the time and date.
Here's FileZilla's conversation with Theodore (the server) on that:
  Status: Calculating timezone offset of server...
  Command: mtime "access-logs"
  Response: 1312772711
  Status: Timezone offsets: Server: -5164211 seconds. Local: -14400 seconds.
  Difference: 5149811 seconds.
Here the "Local" TZO of -14400 represents my EDT TZO of -4:00.
(14400, divided by 60 sec/min, divided by another 60 min/hour, yields 4.)
But the "Server" TZO, of -5164211, represents a TZO of -1434.5 hours,
or, dividing by another 24, roughly 59 3/4 DAYS (!) .
Can that possibly be right ???
Looks like it's off by two whole months!
And I have files there, put in about about a month ago,
whose date/time stamps are almost a month into the future,
e.g., 9/3/2011 (using the usual US m/d/yyyy notation).
Something else for Josh to sort out, let's hope, without
breaking the SSH FTP he's finally got working.
Never a dull moment, eh? Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "<quote>
Exactly. Being realistic, to me, means being able to rely on AxisHOST's
FTP servers being capable of supporting secure authentication and FTP,
just as they had been until a month or so ago, from the moment I first
signed on with them for my web pages.
About as many as bicycles that I just happened by and found unlocked
and easy to make off with, which is to say: none.
Doesn't mean it won't happen, though, does it? And certainly doesn't mean
it *can't* happen :-) .
On that basis, none of the computers that have become bot-owned for the
purposes of sending out spam would ever have gotten compromised, as it
wouldn't have been worth the bot-herder's time.
You don't think getting access to the server for a web site could be a very
lucrative thing for a nefarious individual to try to do? I *do* think so,
and I'll try to take reasonable steps to forestall that happening to me.
And you remain free to do as you would prefer :-) .
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @edantu: "<quote>
Thats not being realistic, that's exactly why things get hacked! Because 
you EXPECT everything to remain static and work just like it did before. 
  You get totally complacent and depend on a server doing what you 
expect - thats not being gregoryroberts@example.com.
Which only proves you dont understand what I was gregoryroberts@example.com.  A 
bicycle getting stolen is a thing of happenstance... ANYONE (well almost 
anyone) who comes across an unwatched bicycle can steal it, it takes NO 
skills, it is totally happenstance, it takes no knowledge. Heck even you 
could do it.
A hacker on the other hand has to KNOW how to eavesdrop on a connection, 
he also has to have some opportunity, he just cant go online and wander 
around until he sees an unguarded connection.
Just why in the world would a hacker who KNOWS how to eavesdrop on a 
connection even LISTEN to yours?  Do you worry obsessively about your 
home being broken into? Are you afraid to go out because a PRO could rob 
your house while you are gone? That's what you are trying to say here. 
Because a pro can break into a bank, with a security system a thousand 
times better than the one protecting your home.  It just isnt going to 
happen though, because there is nothing in your home WORTH the pros time!
There is NOTHING in/on your web site that would even attract a hacker... 
NOTHING!.  Think of it, there are litterally thousand upon thousands of 
web sites like yours with little or NO security - they are simply not 
worth breaking gregoryroberts@example.com.
A hacker who has the requisite knowledge, skills, time and energy to 
eavesdrop on a connection is simply NOT going to bother with the likes 
of yours! There is nothing there that is worth his time!
Once again you equate a HAPPENSTANCE with a hacker. A bot herder is an 
opportunistic feeder. He sends out his spam (with the bot/trojan 
attached) or sets up a web page and nets unsuspecting computers and 
hijacks them.  He doesnt, 'hack' into any given computer, it is totally 
happenstance.  It is just like the bicycle, it takes little or no 
knowledge or skill - it depends totally on being in the right place at 
the right time, just like the guy who walked off with the bicycle, he 
was in the right place (where the bike was) at the right time (when 
nobody was looking).  It is happenstance.
Listening in on a connection with a server is NOT just happenstance. You 
have to know how, you have to have the skills, the knowledge and most 
imporatantly, the opportunity. You don't just wander the web until you 
find one, you go LOOKING for a connection where the rewards are worth 
the time and effort.  And your web pages dont contain anything worth a 
hackers time or effort. It is just that simple.
Why doesn't the pro burgler rob your house... simple, there is nothing 
much there that is worth his time and effort.  The pro would have NO 
PROBLEMS with your security system (even if you have one), he has all 
the knowlege, he could rob you of everything of value and get away with 
it. But he doesnt... simply becaues what you have, is not worth his time 
and effort.  A hacker is almost the same. He could do it, it is well 
within his capabilities, but the rewards of doing so are so minor, its 
actually not worth his time and effort."
    @john: "<quote>
Those are not movies - they are videos. Much shorter.
But watching them is not the intent. It is the titles that are.
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @john: "<quote>
Evidently this idiot doesn't seem to care if he knows his data is 
secure, or may have been compromised by some unknown character, for some 
unknown reason.
Actually, he knows neither.
I bet he leaves his house unlocked while he is away. And never locks his 
taxi.
This mentality is what makes it easy for evil crackers (the media calls 
them "hackers") to access thousands of Windows computers, plant spam 
bots or other problem programs, and attack thousands of other people 
with denial of service and other harmful activities.
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @john: "<quote>
You cannot expect to argue with Dan and get him to listen to reason and 
learn something. Talk to your wall instead.
He is the obsessive idiot who causes so much grief in the lives of 
people who believe he must know something, or he wouldn't have been a 
"helper" at AT&T Worldnet, or a Netscape (AOL) "Champion."
Both which have gone the way of the Dodo.
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @john: "<quote>
That is really a sorry state for a public server to be running.
Anybody can access your personal account information. Or at least you 
can access it.
That outfit needs someone who understands server configuration, 
operation and security.
It appears "Josh" hasn't a clue, and I ain't joshing you. ;-)
I remember stating years ago that I suspected that AxisHOST was a 
fly-by-night operation, but people like Beau, who uses it, disagreed. 
Beau doesn't use SSL.
I don't use AxisHOST.
Hey, if you eat with your fingers, you don't need clean silverware! ;-)
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @john: "<quote>
Response: 1312772711
news@n102:~$ convdate -dc 1312772711
Mon, 8 Aug 2011 03:05:11 +0000 (UTC)
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "<quote>
Complacent? No. Dependent? Yes (isn't that what contracts help assure?)
Realistic or not? Depends on one's PoV.
To use my quota on the AxisHOST servers as storage area for whatever  
keyloggers
or other malware his botnet can then direct botted computers to go fetch.
Worry? Yes. Obsessively? No.
Why must it be a "PRO"? It's already (twice) been amateurs :-) .
Just the disk space ... and the opportunity to make it seem as if it's
ME responsible for the malware or porn or death threats now stored there.
Again, Dan, your arguments haven't persuaded me; I'm *very* glad AxisHOST
has found a (new) way to return some semblance of security to the AUTH
negotiations; and "you remain free to [" think and "] do as you would  
prefer."
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 09:58:21 -0400, John F. Morse <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
John, I need to mull this all over very carefully before I have any hope
of sorting this all out. In the words of the Terminator, "I'll be back."
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 09:58:21 -0400, John F. Morse <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
Well, stick the above report into the Journal of Irreproducible Phenomena.
Today those items showed 7/3/2011 dates, rather much more like it, and
the corresponding FileZilla conversation went like this:
  Status: Calculating timezone offset of server...
  Command: mtime "index.htm"
  Response: 1309894922
  Status: Timezone offsets: Server: -18002 seconds. Local: -14400 seconds.
  Difference: 3602 seconds.
Those 3602 seconds boil down to just about one hour, as is appropriate,
given the expected EDT (here) and CDT (AxisHOST area) TZO pictures.
No idea what temporary gremlins might have been at work (or play)  
yesterday.
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @john: "<quote>
I wouldn't bet money on the horse AxisHOST and what it shows. ;-)
That convdate program is packaged with the INN2 package releases.
As you see above in the command, I ran it on N102 (Debian Squeeze) as 
user news, via SSH over the LAN.
Then I had a bright idea and copied it to this N100 workstation (Ubuntu 
8.04) because I don't have INN2 installed here on N100.
I put it into /usr/local/bin which is on my executable $PATH and it now 
works locally for me.
I don't know any other place to get it as a stand-alone program, but I 
could e-mail it to you. It is 45.3 KB (46412 bytes), so it is not very 
large.
Since it is a Linux/Unix executable, I don't know if Windows could 
handle it. You willing to test this? :-\
Perhaps by using Windows' Cygwin, a "reverse" of Linux's Wine, would 
allow you to run Linux/Unix programs? <url>
Or if you have a C compiler, the source code is below my signature.
Your math background should enable you to read through this and see how 
it works. ;-)
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?
/*  $Id: convdate.c 9024 2010-03-21 16:49:30Z iulius $
**
**  Convert date strings and numbers to numbers and strings.
*/
#include "config.h"
#include "clibrary.h"
#include <ctype.h>
#include <time.h>
#include "inn/messages.h"
#include "inn/libinn.h"
static const char usage[] = "\
Usage: convdate -n [date ...]\n\
       convdate [-dl] -c [time ...]\n\
       convdate [-dl] [-s] [date ...]\n\
\n\
convdate -n converts a date in RFC 5322 format to the number of seconds\n\
since epoch.  convdate -s does the same, but converts to a date string.\n\
convdate -c converts seconds since epoch to a date string.  The default\n\
output is the output of ctime (normally the same format as returned by the\n\
date command).  If -d is given, the output is formatted as a valid Usenet\n\
article Date header.  If -l is given with -d, format the time in local\n\
time rather than UTC.  If no options are given, the -s behavior is the\n\
default; if no dates are given, the current time is used.\n";
/* Whether to format the output as a Date header. */
static bool date_format = false;
/* Whether to use local time instead of UTC. */
static bool date_local = false;
/*
**  Return true if the given string is entirely digits.
*/
static bool
isdigits(const char *p)
{
    for (; *p; p++)
        if (!isdigit((unsigned char) *p))
            return false;
    return true;
}
/*
**  Print date corresponding to the provided time_t.  By default, the output
**  of ctime is printed, but if date_format is true, makedate is used
**  instead.  If date_local is true, format in local time; otherwise, use
**  UTC.  Returns success.
*/
static bool
print_date(time_t date)
{
    char date_buffer[128];
    char *result;
    if (date_format) {
        if (!makedate(date, date_local, date_buffer, sizeof(date_buffer))) {
            warn("can't format %ld", (long) date);
            return false;
        } else {
            printf("%s\n", date_buffer);
        }
    } else {
        result = ctime(&date);
        if (result == NULL) {
            warn("can't format %ld", (long) date);
            return false;
        } else {
            printf("%s", result);
        }
    }
    return true;
}
/*
**  The core function.  Given a string representing a date (in some format
**  given by the mode) and a mode ('s', 'n', or 'c', corresponding to the
**  basic three options to the program), convert the date and print the
**  output.  date may be NULL, in which case the current date is used.
**  Returns true if conversion was successful, false otherwise.
*/
static bool
convdate(const char *date, char mode)
{
    time_t seconds;
    /* Convert the given date to seconds or obtain the current time. */
    if (date == NULL) {
        seconds = time(NULL);
    } else if (mode == 'c') {
        if (!isdigits(date)) {
            warn("\"%s\" doesn't look like a number", date);
            return false;
        } else {
            seconds = (time_t) atol(date);
        }
    } else {
        seconds = parsedate_rfc5322_lax(date);
        if (seconds == (time_t) -1) {
            warn("can't convert \"%s\"", date);
            return false;
        }
    }
    /* Output the resulting date. */
    if (mode == 'n') {
        printf("%ld\n", (long) seconds);
        return true;
    } else {
        return print_date(seconds);
    }
}
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    int option, status;
    char *date;
    char mode = '\0';
    message_program_name = "convdate";
    /* Parse options. */
    while ((option = getopt(argc, argv, "cdhlns")) != EOF) {
        switch (option) {
        case 'h':
            printf("%s\n", usage);
            exit(0);
            break;
        case 'd':
            date_format = true;
            break;
        case 'l':
            date_local = true;
            break;
        case 'c':
        case 'n':
        case 's':
            if (mode != 0) die("only one of -c, -n, or -s is allowed");
            mode = option;
            break;
        default:
            fprintf(stderr, "%s", usage);
            exit(1);
            break;
        }
    }
    if (mode == '\0')
        mode = 's';
    argc -= optind;
    argv += optind;
    /* Perform the desired action for each provided argument. */
    if (argc == 0) {
        exit(convdate(NULL, mode) ? 0 : 1);
    } else {
        for (date = *argv, status = 0; date != NULL; date = *++argv)
            status += (convdate(date, mode) ? 0 : 1);
        exit(status);
    }
}"
    @tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs: "<quote>
I don't need this horse to *win*, just to stay in the race and *finish*.
But that's neither here nor there.
Want me to try installing the cygwin environment, and then running
your binary for convdate in it? I'm game to try that :-) . Send the
binaries (but please *not* TARred (or feathered)) as attachment to
me at any of the old att.net addresses you know worked in the past,
I'll ACK its arrival there.
I have no C compiler here. (I do have a minimal Python environment,
but that'll be of no use with a C program, whether source or compiled.)
I'm glad you realize you must smile when you say that  my math background
has me prepared for *theorems* and *proofs*  not for *programs*. As my
former advisors might have said, "Those ain't math  they're doo-doo!"
But please not to be offended by the above feeble attempt at humor :-) .
Cheers,  tlvp
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP"
    @john: "<quote>
It's in the mail.... ;-)
It is a Linux executable binary, not tared, feathered, or scrunched in 
any way. It would run directly on a Linux box.
John
When a person has  whether they knew it or not  already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?"
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 20:12:50 -0400, John F. Morse <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
OK, I have it, I have Cygwin, and I have Cygwin installed.
Basically, Cygwin gives me a bash prompt in a simulated Unix environment  
in a DOS box.
Thus far, the Cygwin Bash Shell hasn't yet found your binary convdate,  
probably 'cuz
I haven't yet learned how to tell the shell where to find that binary.
This should help:
  $ mount
  C:/cygwin/bin on /usr/bin type ntfs (binary,auto)
  C:/cygwin/lib on /usr/lib type ntfs (binary,auto)
  C:/cygwin on / type ntfs (binary,auto)
  C: on /cygdrive/c type ntfs (binary,posix=0,user,noumount,auto)
  D: on /cygdrive/d type ntfs (binary,posix=0,user,noumount,auto)
On the other hand, this hinders:
  $ path
  bash: path: command not found
  $ man path
  No manual entry for path
Hard to know, then, where I should move (or copy) convdate if Bash
won't tell me where it looks, by default, for its executables.
Ah, well, it's not the time to stop just yet :-) .
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @whocares: "<quote>
Moot point but..
SFTP using SSH is what I use and 'Jailed SSH' was enabled while still 
with Axishost a few years ago.
When tried with correct new server settings, I got a message that 'the 
profile had not been cached'; do you still want to connect, or something 
like that. Yes and I got connected."
    @PtUlRvGEpTrHeEsSsE: "On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 22:45:19 -0400, tlvp <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
OK, resolved now, to use FileZilla's SFTP (with AUTH secured behind SSH).
But:
There's a mystery with the date/time stamps Theodore shows me.
A few days ago, the last files I'd uploaded, in July (using insecure FTP
because nothing secure was working for me), showed September datestamps
Yesterday, they showed their correct early July datestamps.
Just today I uploaded new files, and then found dates of September 2011
on those same July uploads as earlier.
So I screen-scraped and put a jpeg image of one scene up in
<url> .
That itself then developed an *October* time stamp, as you'll see in
<url> .
What gives? (This is using FileZilla's SFTP (i.e., FTP with SSH AUTH).)
I've asked Josh, too, but it's too early to expect any answer from him.
Cheers,  tlvp"
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 40, "forum_name": "alt.att.20140807.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-alt.att.parquet'}